Re: Thread 5: Defining the namespace

[Simon Higgs <simon@higgs.com>]

At 4:26 PM -0800 12/26/96, Michael Dillon wrote:

> On Thu, 26 Dec 1996, Simon Higgs wrote:
>
> > > The namespace cannot be *DIVIDED* up in a meaningful way.
>
> > Of course it can.
> >
> > > Your statement
> > > implies that the namespace is some sort of unitary thing and the only
> > > problem is to find where the natural divisions lay.
> > >
> >
> > Uh... it's called library science.
>
> And I am saying that the namespace is not something that can be carved
> up by library science.
>

We disagree.

> > What do you
> > think Yahoo, Lycos, Alta-Vista etc. do?
>
> AltaVista doesn't classify anything at all. It's purely a text searching
> tool. And Yahoo does not use library science to categorize things but
> instead often creates sub-categories that are in multiple larger
> categories.


So why did Yahoo hire an expert librarian to develop their categories?

> A single book needs to be in a single location on a single
> shelf. There can be only one right classification for a book. This is a
> problem well solved by library science. However the namespace is not
> a set of books, it is more like a set of words which, like many natural
> words, have multiple meanings. Even professional librarians understand
> that a single book may be referenced under several subject entries in
> their card catalogues.
>

QUOTE: "A single book needs to be in a single location on a single shelf."

A DNS entry can only be in a single location in the name space.

The difference? Not much.

> > Why was .COM and .EDU created to distinguish between commercial and
> > educational organizations? What should be happening now is just further
> > division, focus, and refinement of the name space.
>
> .COM and .EDU were created by people who didn't fully understand the
> implications of attempting to carve up the namespace.

I don't think you really meant that.

> This can be clearly
> seen when you understand that .COM contains registrations for educational
> institions, non-commercial charitable organizations, military
> organizations, etc. In effect, .COM has become synonymous with COMMON
> not with COMMERCIAL.
>

Commercial. Commerce. Business. Growth. Expansion. Any of that sound familiar?


Regards,

Simon

--
If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you.